Saffold v Conway - Saffold v. Conway A. What is the issue...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Saffold v. Conway A. What is the issue to be decided by the court in this case? In this case, the court must decide whether property owner Timothy Nagle was authorized as an agent to sell his land and enter into a binding purchase agreement with the Saffolds. The Saffolds entered into the agreement believing that Nagle had the authority to act as an agent on behalf of the principal and could execute a real estate sales contract. Nagle signed and submitted the agreement without the signatures of the other property owners, but claims that he found the contract to not be binding because a deposit of $10,000 was not made in the time specified in the purchase agreement. The Saffolds claim that Nagle represented himself, in words and conduct, as the authorized agent and ask the court to enforce the contract. B. Who owns the land that is the subject of this action? Timothy Nagle and Maureen Meehan own one-half of the property and John and Frances Conway own one-half as tenants by the entireties. C. What are tenants by the entireties? ( Hint: Review Shared Estates in Real Property in Learning Plan 7) Tenants by the entireties are similar to a joint tenancy except the two people holding the title is a
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/15/2011 for the course BUSINESS L 101 taught by Professor Smith during the Spring '11 term at American.

Page1 / 2

Saffold v Conway - Saffold v. Conway A. What is the issue...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online